Understanding Performance of a Vulnerable Heterogeneous Edge Data Center: A Modeling Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Internet of Things (IoT) jobs not only require computational resources but also are delay-sensitive and security-sensitive. Edge computing emerges as a promising paradigm to improve the quality of experience for IoT users. Edge computing faces many security threats, perhaps even more than traditional data centers. With a growing amount of data offloaded to Edge Data Centers (EDCs), the EDC performance needs to be considered and evaluated carefully for improving the vulnerable EDC resource utilization while satisfying IoT job requirements. This paper develops an analytical model, which can capture the dynamics of an EDC system with the following features: (i) The system is under heterogeneous workloads; (ii) the system is subject to attacks, which prevent equipment units in the system from providing service and (iii) the jobs in the system are delay-sensitive. Namely, the job processing fails before the processing is completed. Based on the proposed model, we develop formulas for performance and profit metrics and conduct a series of simulation experiments to verify the correctness and accuracy of our model. Finally, through our model, we evaluate the performance of the EDC, and we offer solutions for EDC administrators to maximize profit.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".